I sincerely hope Judt is not representative of the New York elites. He was just as an anti Israel when Kadima was in charge as he is now. People tend to get carried away about Kadima and do not realize that it is not at all a Leftist party. In fact, even the full fledged Left parties in Israel such as Meretz would not satisfy his kind of vision.

I wonder what he means by calling himself a post-Zionist. If he keeps militating for a one bi-national state then he cannot be a Zionist, or post-Zionist. In a way all Israelis and their advocates are post-Zionists in the true sense of the word, if we consider that Zionism reached its stated goal with the establishment of the Jewish state in Israel. When Israelis nowadays use the term Zionist they mean it in the sense of patriotic, nothing more nor less.

I don’t like the fact that the Times published Judt’s essay, but it doesn’t make the newspaper anti-Israel. Just last week they published an op-ed by the Israeli ambassador to the U.S., Michael Oren.

The Times doesn’t like right-wing Israeli governments, but that doesn’t make it anti-Israel.

The form of that event was a hastily written essay; But that is just the outward form, the messenger, not the event itself. The op-ed was not meant as an analysis, nor is it an attempt to persuade. It was published to intimidate. Tony Judt, for all his talents, is known as an anti-Israel zealot. And portraying his views as mainstream is a shot across the bow of Netanyahu.

If there is any subtext, it is that the elites of New York and Washington prefer Kadima to Likud.